[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [RRG] Consensus? End-user networks need their own portable address space

To: "'Lixia Zhang'" <lixia@CS.UCLA.EDU>, "'rrg'" <rrg@psg.com>
Subject: RE: [RRG] Consensus? End-user networks need their own portable address space
From: "Tony Li" <tony.li@tony.li>
Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 00:51:44 -0700
In-reply-to: <D768ED72-7E13-4A00-A9BE-7CAD76F5F5CA@cs.ucla.edu>
References: <483932D3.6040203@firstpr.com.au> <99E28965-F760-4966-B561-62089B668EFA@multicasttech.com> <573019AFAC1E40A29CF739768C3600F6@ad.redback.com> <483A30D0.5020906@firstpr.com.au> <5BC1F1B566CA4A34B9AEF297EFDCB05F@ad.redback.com> <D768ED72-7E13-4A00-A9BE-7CAD76F5F5CA@cs.ucla.edu>
Reply-to: <tony.li@tony.li>

 

|> |The point of my argument is that the only possible mechanism is
|> |portability.
|>
|>
|> Provably incorrect: many organizations are very happy 
|sitting behind  
|> a NAT
|> box.  It provides excellent addressing isolation.
|
|hmm, aren't addresses behind a NAT box portable addresses?


No, they're usually private (RFC 1918) addresses.

Tony


--
to unsubscribe send a message to rrg-request@psg.com with the
word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [RRG] Consensus? End-user networks need their own portable address space
  - From: Lixia Zhang <lixia@CS.UCLA.EDU>

References:
- [RRG] Consensus? End-user networks need their own portable address space
  - From: Robin Whittle <rw@firstpr.com.au>
- Re: [RRG] Consensus? End-user networks need their own portable address space
  - From: Marshall Eubanks <tme@multicasttech.com>
- RE: [RRG] Consensus? End-user networks need their own portable address space
  - From: "Tony Li" <tony.li@tony.li>
- Re: [RRG] Consensus? End-user networks need their own portable address space
  - From: Robin Whittle <rw@firstpr.com.au>
- RE: [RRG] Consensus? End-user networks need their own portable address space
  - From: "Tony Li" <tony.li@tony.li>
- Re: [RRG] Consensus? End-user networks need their own portable address space
  - From: Lixia Zhang <lixia@CS.UCLA.EDU>

Prev by Date: Re: [RRG] Re: We can't bet the Internet on the imminent adoption of IPv6
Next by Date: RE: [RRG] What do we have consensus on?
Previous by thread: Re: [RRG] Consensus? End-user networks need their own portable address space
Next by thread: Re: [RRG] Consensus? End-user networks need their own portable address space
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread